Evaluation of Septic Tank and Subsurface Wetland for

More documents

Recommendations

Info

Figure 4-1 An example of grab sample collection. The author is using a syringe to collect the wetland inlet water quality sample at Retrieve. (Photograph of author.) The effluent sample at Retrieve was collected by boring a hole in the bottom of the wetland effluent pipe and attaching a two-liter plastic bottle to collect water as it trickled 25
out (see Figure 4-2). Locating the hole at the bottom of the pipe may have resulted in a higher concentration of solids in the sample bottle that what exited the wetland. On October 5 the two-liter bottle was not sufficient to fill all the jars for the NWC laboratory and for inter-laboratory comparison. In this instance, water was added from the mid- wetland sample point to make one homogenous sample of sufficient volume. Figure 4-2 Retrieve effluent collection apparatus showing pipe tap and collection bottle under a steel grill. (Photograph by author.) One duplicate sample was collected for each round, making a total of seven samples for each sample set taken to the NWC laboratory in Bogue, St. James (Montego Bay metropolitan area). Each BOD, TSS, nutrient and pH sample was stored in an acid washed one half gallon HDPE jug. Each coliform sample was stored in a sterilized 250ml glass bottle. All samples were transported at ambient temperature as is customary for samples delivered to the NWC laboratory within three hours of collection. 26
Page 1 and 2: Evaluation of Septic Tank and Subsu
Page 3 and 4: Abstract Locally designed wastewate
Page 5 and 6: Acknowledgments Major funding was p
Page 7 and 8: Chapter 6 - Costs ……………
Page 9 and 10: Table 5-6 Parameters Influencing Bi
Page 11 and 12: The predominant geological formatio
Page 13 and 14: plants discharging a volume of 20m
Page 15 and 16: lack access to acceptable excreta d
Page 17 and 18: Critical design parameters for sept
Page 19 and 20: Subsurface Flow Constructed Wetland
Page 21 and 22: inging larger rock from a distant q
Page 23 and 24: Chapter 3 - Site Descriptions Figur
Page 25 and 26: Wetland inlet sample point Flush to
Page 27 and 28: Figure 3-4 Pisgah wetland beds befo
Page 29 and 30: times over a two-week period, grew
Page 31 and 32: Figure 3-7 Retrieve youth in front
Page 33: Chapter 4 - Methodology Field Data
Page 37 and 38: Figure 4-3 Media porosity measureme
Page 39 and 40: Laboratory Water Quality Analysis A
Page 41 and 42: NEPA laboratory also does not test
Page 43 and 44: Since evapotranspiration decreases
Page 45 and 46: The water level in the middle of th
Page 47 and 48: BOD was determined to be 53% at Pis
Page 49 and 50: solids than a sample point that pul
Page 51 and 52: Table 5-4 Ammonia (NH3-N) for Pisga
Page 53 and 54: Table 5-5 Nitrate (NO3-N) for Pisga
Page 55 and 56: o Alkalinity Nitrification and deni
Page 57 and 58: system were measured to be 3.3 mg/l
Page 59 and 60: coliform by 88%. The Retrieve septi
Page 61 and 62: Chapter 6 - Cost of Pisgah and Retr
Page 63 and 64: The septic tanks will have to be pu
Page 65 and 66: Jamaica may refer to the hydraulic
Page 67 and 68: Chapter 8 - References APHA (Americ
Page 69 and 70: Pennant, Joseph, (2005), Assistant
Page 71 and 72: Chapter 9 - Appendices Appendix 1 -
Page 73 and 74: 7-Dec- 2004 SET FIVE Sample BOD TSS
Page 75 and 76: Appendix 3 - Determination of 90% C
Page 77 and 78: Appendix 4 - Conductance of Water C
Page 79 and 80: Appendix 6 - Total Dissolved Nitrog
Page 81 and 82: Appendix 8 - Evapotranspiration Det

Evaluation of Septic Tank and Subsurface Wetland for

You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles

Delete template?

Save as template?